 | Samuel March Phillipps - 1815 - 600 str.
..." to add any thing to an agreement in writing by admitting parol evidence, which would affect land, is not only contrary to the statute of frauds, but to the rule of common law, before that statute was in being." It is not, however, expressly stated in the... | |
 | Thomas Starkie - 1826 - 708 str.
...that to add any thing to an agreement in writing, by admitting parol evidence which would affect land, is not only contrary to the statute of Frauds, but to the rule of common law before the statute was in being ; yet, as mere parol agreements concerning land... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Chancery - 1827 - 724 str.
...himself to the deed ; and that to add any thing to an agreement in writing by admitting parol evidence is not only contrary to the statute of frauds, but to the rule of the common law before that statute. The present case is L 178 ] favourable for the wife. The... | |
 | Jacob D. Wheeler - 1835 - 620 str.
...to contra- s"" ° diet, or substantially vary, the legal import of a written agree- courts of ment. Such testimony is not only contrary to the statute...most other points, are the same in courts of law and equity. Yet simple contracts in 3_ writing, may be a. ERWIN v. SAITNDERS, Aug. T. 1823, 1 Cow. NY Rep.... | |
 | James Philemon Holcombe - 1846 - 376 str.
...inadmissibility of parol evidence to contradict, or substantially vary the legal import of a written agreement. Such testimony is not only contrary to the Statute...most other points, are the same in Courts of Law and Equity. But corporate seal was sufficient to prevent the granting of an injunction, or to warrant its... | |
 | 1846 - 660 str.
...Parteriche v. Poulet (2 Atkyns, 384).— A charge and matter by the answer must be discharged by proof. It is not only contrary to the Statute of Frauds, but to the common law before the statute, to add any thing to an agreement in writing by parol evidence. (t) Shaw... | |
 | New York (State). Supreme Court, John Lansing Wendell - 1847 - 704 str.
...because no evidence will be admitted to control tlieir purport. Comyris Dig. Attorney, c. 14, U. 3. 2. Such testimony is not only contrary to the statute of frauds, but to the maxims of the common law. The general rule, that such evidence is inadmissible, " outfit not to be a subject of discussion. It... | |
 | Joseph Henry Dart - 1851 - 1234 str.
...vary a written agreement; for, to add anything to an agreement in writing by admitting parol evidence, is not only contrary to the statute of frauds, but to the rule of the common law, before that statute was in being. But after the agreement has been reduced... | |
 | Robert Henley Eden Baron Henley - 1852 - 770 str.
...vary a written agreement; for to add anything to an agreement in writing by admitting parol evidence, is not only contrary to the statute of frauds, but to the rule of the common law, before that statute was in being. But after the agreement has been reduced... | |
 | Oliver Lorenzo Barbour, New York (State). Supreme Court - 1854 - 722 str.
...equity.'" He quotes the language of Chancellor Kent in Stevens v. Cooper, (1 John. Ch. Rep. 429,) that " the rules of evidence on this, as on most other points,...are the same in courts of law and of equity." The chancellor also says in Movan \. Hays, (1 John. Ch. Rep. 343,) the rule is well established in this... | |
| |
Such testimony is not only contrary to the statute of frauds, but to the maxims of the common law ; and the rules of evidence on this, as on most other points, are the same in courts of law and of equity. 
